During the Clinton administration, the FBI had access to records of gun background checks for up to 180 days. But in 2003, Congress began requiring that the records be destroyed within 24 hours. This requirement, one of the many restrictions on gun data sponsored by Rep. Todd Tiahrt (R-Kan.), meant that Hasan’s investigators were blocked from searching records to determine whether he or other terrorist suspects had purchased guns. When Hasan walked out of Guns Galore in Killeen, Tex., the FBI had only 24 hours to recognize and flag the record — and then it was gone, forever.

(2) If receipt of a firearm would not violate section 922 (g) or (n) or State law, the system shall—(A) assign a unique identification number to the transfer; (B) provide the licensee with the number; and (C) destroy all records of the system with respect to the call (other than the identifying number and the date the number was assigned) and all records of the system relating to the person or the transfer.

Sorry, Bloomberg, it’s in the signature piece of gun control legislation, you know, the one that was rammed down our throats in 1993 and partly resulted in the Democrats losing Congress in 1994? Suddenly now it’s inadequate and is responsible for arming terrorists? Perhaps they need to complain to the Brady Campaign for pushing their signature legislation.

The problem for Bloomberg is that the truth is inconvenient. If a lie helps discredit the Tiahrt Amendment, which thwarted the City of New York from continuing its lawsuits against firearms manufacturers to hold them responsible for criminals using guns, so much the better. I’m only sorry a paper like the Washington Post is only so willing to play along. It’s not hard to fact check these claims, but it appears helping with the agenda is more important.

UPDATE: I would also point out there was nothing in the Tiahrt Amendment language that prevented law enforcement from tracing the firearms used in the Ft. Hood shooting. That’s how we know he acquired them through legal channels, since he was not convicted of anything prior.

SEC. 617. (a) None of the funds appropriated pursuant to this Act or any other provision of law may be used for—

(1) the implementation of any tax or fee in connection with the implementation of subsection 922(t) of title 18, United States Code; and

(2) any system to implement subsection 922(t) of title 18, United States Code, that does not require and result in the destruction of any identifying information submitted by or on behalf of any person who has been determined not to be prohibited from possessing or receiving a firearm no more than 24 hours after the system advises a Federal firearms licensee that possession or receipt of a firearm by the prospective transferee would not violate subsection (g) or (n) of section 922 of title 18, United States Code, or State law. (b) Subsection (a)(2) shall take effect not later than 180 days after enactment of this Act.

I should note that the current appropriations bill also contains this language (See Sec. 512). This language was necessary because the Clinton Administration had implemented a rule that allowed the records to be kept, despite what the Brady Act called for. Apparently this was upheld by the courts when challenged. So it would seem I was wrong, and Bloomberg isn’t lying about Tiahrt. Bloomberg merely wants the federal government to return to the previous practice of ignoring the Brady Act, and thus federal law.

9 Responses to “Bloomberg Continues to Lie About Tiahrt”

The omnibus appropriations bill passed by the Senate in January contains several important reforms in federal gun laws to protect the privacy of people who lawfully exercise their constitutional rights. Most of the reforms undo abuses of federal power introduced in the Clinton era.

First, the bill–which passed the House in 2003 and was sponsored by Rep. Todd Tiahrt (R-Kan.)–requires that federal records on lawful gun purchasers approved by the National Instant Check System (NICS) be destroyed within 24 hours. When Congress created the NICS in 1993, it added an amendment to require destruction of records on law-abiding gun owners: “No department, agency, officer, or employee of the United States may . . . use the system established under this section to establish any system for the registration of firearms (or) firearm owners . . . .”

The 1993 law reinforced the Firearms Owners’ Protection Act of 1986 (FOPA), which prohibited the creation of a registry of gun owners. FOPA mandated that no “system of registration of firearms, firearms owners, or firearms transactions or dispositions be established.” Thus, the new 2004 law brings the federal government into compliance with long-standing federal statutes.

Second, the “Tiahrt amendment” reinforces existing provisions in federal and local gun laws prohibiting the release of those records that are allowed to be kept on gun owners. Federal law requires that dealers inform federal law enforcement any time a person purchases two or more handguns in a five-day period. Current law requires the federal government to keep private the names of lawful purchasers.

In a sort of back-handed way – them lying makes it easier to fight. OTOH, they are right in that federal law prohibits retaining purchase records, just wrong in *which* federal law. And they won’t stop with Tiahrt…

With his “terror suspects and guns” agenda, Mike Bloomberg is flatly advocating a “guilty until proven innocent” approach.

People, this is UNBELIEVABLE and wholly unacceptable.

Look … I don’t want terrorists to have guns, or buy guns. But we have to realize that stripping away substantive or fundamental rights because you are only “under investigation” is a path that we cannot go down. This path leads to people being thrown in jail for years without any criminal charges placed on them. That is absolutely wrong … even in the case of suspected terrorists.

Conspiring to commit terrorism is criminal. If these “terror suspects” are so dangerous, we must simply must resolve to arrest, charge, and prosecute them.

At least in this case, it’s about making more guns illegal … or more specifically, about increasing the pool of prohibited persons.

I think it’s a little over-the-top to claim it’s evidence that they wish to make ALL guns illegal.

I mean … I persnally believe that’s generally the end-game hope or goal of many gun control advocates. But I can’t sit here and say that Bloomberg’s push to add “suspected terrorists” to the list of prohibited persons as evidence that he wishes to make all guns illegal.